I knew batfans were obessive but come on?

[xisaacx]

i do think the petition thing is a bit much. But Im just not a fan of re-casting in general. Like in the sense with iron man, id rather they just keep Rodney(war machine) out of it than recast cheadle in place of Howard. Plus in my opinion you start recasting it becomes like all the other batman movies, I mean how many batmans(keaton, clooney, kilmer) did we have? how many jokers are we going to have?

 

[katie_girl09]

You will be missed They are already putting on their Walmart costumes and sharpening their plastic batarangs.

They're at home.



WASHING THEIR TIGHTS!

HAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHA!
You guys are hilarious!
Personally I've always preferred Jack's Joker to Heath Ledger's. I loved how he joked about everything but you knew he was dangerous. Them expecting Joker to never appear again in any future Batman movie (not just Nolan's Batman) is beyond ridiculous. I agree with everyone here: the character is always bigger than the actor.
That said, I feel that Nolan should never bring Joker back out of respect for Heath Ledger and his following.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Re-cast for the next movie!!!

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

Re-cast for the next movie!!!

If they re-cast, it wouldn't bother me so much.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

These "fans" are ******ed. I personally feel that Ledger's performance is overrated. If Ledger were still alive, I doubt his performance would be getting this much praise.

In my opinion, Mark is still the best Joker in film/television history. He just did the character so perfectly. Heath definitely put his own spin and stamp on the character, but when I read Batman it's Mark's voice I hear in my head, not Heath.

Totally agree on that.

 

[Matt]

Ledger's performance wasn't as great as everyone acts. Jack's was better. Being dead doesn't make your performance the end all. There, someone had to say it.

 

[Matt]

These "fans" are ******ed. I personally feel that Ledger's performance is overrated. If Ledger were still alive, I doubt his performance would be getting this much praise.



Totally agree on that.

Looks like someone beat me to it.

 

[Cunning Stunts]

Ledger's performance wasn't as great as everyone acts. Jack's was better. Being dead doesn't make your performance the end all. There, someone had to say it.

I hate those obsessive Batfans as much as anyone, but I have to disagree on a major level here. I think Heath was completely deserving of the Oscar, and Jack was terrible. Jack was just Jack with Joker's suit on. Heath embodied his character beyond anything Jack Nicholson is capable of.

I do think that Heath's performance received even more praise because he died, but with or without his death, his performance was incredible to begin with.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Well I think you can't compare Heath and Jack's performances. They were basically two very different characters.

But in terms of actual acting craft and the amount of work he put in, Ledger wins out IMO.

But I thoroughly enjoy both portrayals, the Joker should never be retired.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Looks like someone beat me to it.

More people need to say it. I wouldn't say Jack's was better as I think they were both going for a different type of Joker.

 

[Matt]

I hate those obsessive Batfans as much as anyone, but I have to disagree on a major level here. I think Heath was completely deserving of the Oscar, and Jack was terrible. Jack was just Jack with Joker's suit on. Heath embodied his character beyond anything Jack Nicholson is capable of.

I do think that Heath's performance received even more praise because he died, but with or without his death, his performance was incredible to begin with.

To be honest, I didn't feel like Ledger was the Joker. I felt like he was Hannibal Lecter meets Simon Gruber with clown make up on.

Jack on the other hand, you could actually see the humor in what he was doing. You hated yourself for laughing because it was sadistic, but it was still some funny ****. Nothing Ledger did outside of the magic trick was really funny. His delivery was at times, but hell, you can make lines from Clayface funny with the right delivery, doesn't mean you're the Joker.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

"What's the time?"

"What does that matter?"

"Well...depending on the time he could be in one spot, or several"

That's pure Joker to me.

The thing with Joker is that he can be interpreted many different ways but still retain the same traits. Jack was a mafia boss who used peoples greed and vanity against them, perfect for the yuppie days of the 80s and 90s. Heath was the ultimate urban terrorist. No real motives, completely indiscriminate, almost supernaturally unstoppable. Hits home in the terroist weary days of our era.

 

[Sawyer]

You guys are all being a little ******ed honestly... why the **** should there be a recast?! How bout we spend time on some time on some different characters for the next movie, huh? Instead of spending time on recasting a character/villains who Nolan basically did to perfection in the last movie.

NEW VILLAINS, GET OVER IT!

 

[Cunning Stunts]

To be honest, I didn't feel like Ledger was the Joker. I felt like he was Hannibal Lecter meets Simon Gruber with clown make up on.

Jack on the other hand, you could actually see the humor in what he was doing. You hated yourself for laughing because it was sadistic, but it was still some funny ****. Nothing Ledger did outside of the magic trick was really funny. His delivery was at times, but hell, you can make lines from Clayface funny with the right delivery, doesn't mean you're the Joker.

Eh, I feel the opposite... Like Heath more embodied a more sick, psychologically-warping, and philosophically-driven Joker that would apply more to Nolan's "grounded in realism" take, and all of that brought about the epic standoff at the end. Jack was just Jack, who did what the script told him. I saw no real character immersion at all, whether or not The Joker had his "gags" in Batman '89 and not in The Dark Knight.

 

[SuperFerret]

I still think the perfect Joker is out there still. One that combines the wackiness of Romero, the charisma of Jack, the sarcastic wit of Hammil and the murderous tendencies of Ledger.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Hamill's laugh, too.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

You guys are all being a little ******ed honestly... why the **** should there be a recast?! How bout we spend time on some time on some different characters for the next movie, huh? Instead of spending time on recasting a character/villains who Nolan basically did to perfection in the last movie.

NEW VILLAINS, GET OVER IT!

Because Joker isn't just your standard villain. Why not make a villain in a comic book film a re-occuring menace for once? Joker would be perfect for that.

And don't give me that crap about "Joker's story is done!". As long as Batman's story isn't done, Joker's isn't. If Heath was still alive today there wouldn't be one single person on this board saying the Joker is done.

I wouldn't want him thrown in there for no reason. But with a creative team like the Nolan's and a character like Joker, there is endless possibilities.

And I think he does have a motive to make his presence felt in the next film. Would Joker let the guy who "completes him" be killed by another villain or the cops? NO CHANCE. Joker would want to be the only one to have that pleasure. He wouldn't just sit in his cell twiddling his thumbs and he can easily escape as shown in TDK.

But saying all that who says Joker needs to be the main villain? Joker is the sort of character who can be a thorn in Batman's, the police and the other villains sides. I can imagine now, Riddlers ultimate plan coming to fruition, all hope looks lost for Batman then Joker pops up like a literal jack-in-the-box and throws a spanner into Riddlers works.

 

[SuperFerret]

Hamill's laugh, too.

Yeah, Hamill has the best Joker laugh.

Because Joker isn't just your standard villain. Why not make a villain in a comic book film a re-occuring menace for once? Joker would be perfect for that.

Magneto, Lex Luthor, Norman Osborn, Victor Von Doom.

 

[Sawyer]

Because Joker isn't just your standard villain. Why not make a villain in a comic book film a re-occuring menace for once? Joker would be perfect for that.

And don't give me that crap about "Joker's story is done!". As long as Batman's story isn't done, Joker's isn't. If Heath was still alive today there wouldn't be one single person on this board saying the Joker is done.

I wouldn't want him thrown in there for no reason. But with a creative team like the Nolan's and a character like Joker, there is endless possibilities.

And I think he does have a motive to make his presence felt in the next film. Would Joker let the guy who "completes him" be killed by another villain or the cops? NO CHANCE. Joker would want to be the only one to have that pleasure. He wouldn't just sit in his cell twiddling his thumbs and he can easily escape as shown in TDK.

But saying all that who says Joker needs to be the main villain? Joker is the sort of character who can be a thorn in Batman's, the police and the other villains sides. I can imagine now, Riddlers ultimate plan coming to fruition, all hope looks lost for Batman then Joker pops up like a literal jack-in-the-box and throws a spanner into Riddlers works.

I agree. But he's not. Recasting is almost always terrible. Heath's and Nolan's Joker was so their own, I wouldnt really want to see anyone else doing what he did in the role. It would feel like they were doing an impression of Heath, which would've been as bad as if Heath had done an impersonation of Jack.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Magneto, Lex Luthor, Norman Osborn, Victor Von Doom.

Good point. But Dr Doom wasn't really Dr Doom. Norman Osborn was just visions.

But I think they could make Joker like a horror movie type villain in a comic book movie. That would be unique. Have him randomly pop up at different times to cause havoc.

I agree. But he's not. Recasting is almost always terrible. Heath's and Nolan's Joker was so their own, I wouldnt really want to see anyone else doing what he did in the role.

Yea that's fair. But see with a guy like Joker I don't think it wouldn't be out of character for him to re-emerge from Arkham slightly different from when he went in. It has even been alluded to in the comics. I think that could be pretty interesting. Still keep the same sorta look and voice. But he still be slightly different, maybe gone even more crazy because he is locked away from his "play thing" Batman?

They wouldn't have to do a straight up impersination of Heath is what I'm getting at. It's the frickin Joker! He is completely mentally scattered.

 

[Majic Walrus]

I agree. But he's not. Recasting is almost always terrible. Heath's and Nolan's Joker was so their own, I wouldnt really want to see anyone else doing what he did in the role. It would feel like they were doing an impression of Heath, which would've been as bad as if Heath had done an impersonation of Jack.

Agreed.

 

[SuperFerret]

Good point. But Dr Doom wasn't really Dr Doom. Norman Osborn was just visions.

Victor not being the "real" Dr. Doom is moot, as he was a threat in each FF movie (and he actually played a better Lex Luthor than Hackman or Spacey, but I digress). Norman's influence on Harry, represented by the visions, plagued Spider-Man in the sequels, first by having Harry send Ock off after MJ, then by actually corrupting Harry himself against Peter. That's all Norman's doing, even if it's indirectly.

 

[Ghostvirus]

I do think that they should wait a while before bringing the Joker back, but Ledger if anything proved that the Joker can be improved upon. I thought after Nicholson there wouldn't be another one better, but I was wrong, so why close the door to that. I do think that the Joker should not come back into the Nolan films.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Victor not being the "real" Dr. Doom is moot, as he was a threat in each FF movie (and he actually played a better Lex Luthor than Hackman or Spacey, but I digress). Norman's influence on Harry, represented by the visions, plagued Spider-Man in the sequels, first by having Harry send Ock off after MJ, then by actually corrupting Harry himself against Peter. That's all Norman's doing, even if it's indirectly.

Well then yea you are right. So if those guys can be re-occuring villains, why not the Joker be a re-occuring villain? They should tie Batman's fate to Joker's, like they alluded to in TDK. Why build up that relationship to just go "OK, we'll leave Batman's greatest nemesis out of the finale to the trilogy"

That makes no sense.

 

[JStorm]

Batfans are not obsessive, sociopaths - but obsessive.